Wednesday, February 8, 2012

Currier & Ives sizes

One of the most common ways to spot a Currier & Ives reproduction is that the size is wrong. While there are some reproductions that are made to the same size as the originals, by far most Currier & Ives copies are the wrong size. This is an important point, but it also brings up the general topic of sizes as related to Currier & Ives, the subject of this posting.

The first thing to know about Currier & Ives sizes is that they are usually, and should always be given for just the images themselves, not including the margins nor the title area, and the vertical size is given first. The primary reason for this is that the “standard” reference listing Currier & Ives prints, Frederic A. Conningham’s Currier & Ives Prints. An Illustrated Check List gives the sizes in this way. Ever since it was first issued in 1949, this work lists the sizes of Currier & Ives prints (where they are given-—not all prints have their size indicated) “exclusive of margins.”

As Conningham's book became the standard reference for collectors and dealers from its first issue, and to some extent remains so today, it makes sense that those who work with Currier & Ives prints have followed Conningham in the way he gives measurements.

There are other reasons to do this as well. Gale Research’s listing of the prints (Currier & Ives. A Catalogue Raisonne) does not follow Conningham, but gives the vertical size as including the text below the image. This problematic, not only because it creates a discrepancy between the two reference books, but more importantly because the text below the image is sometimes trimmed, especially where there is a small copyright line below the title. This makes it impossible to check the size compared to the listing. This is as opposed to Conningham's measurements, for the image is much less often trimmed. And, of course, as the margins of many prints are trimmed at least somewhat, giving the measurements of the full sheet of paper would be practically useless.

Interestingly, however, in one way the Conningham measurements are not usually followed today, viz. in the measurement of the prints in sixteenths of inches. It makes sense to measure in inches, for these are quintessential American prints and so an American measurement should be used. However, many dealers and collectors measure only to the nearest eight of an inch. First off, Conningham used the notation, e.g., 8.4 to indicate 8 4/16th, rather than the more standard 8 1/4, but beyond this there is an even more fundamental reason not to use sixteenths of an inch.

That is that the sizes of original prints actually vary by a fair bit. There are a number of reasons for this. One would be what paper was used and how it was prepared for printing, as different lots of paper would respond differently over time. Then the most common is that paper expands or contracts over time, depending on how it was treated, whether it got wet, was stored in a humid environment and so forth. Thus the image drawn on the stone might be 8 1/4 tall, but the image on the paper today can vary from this either by being smaller or larger, the former being more common.

There is also the fact that Currier & Ives are known to have used different stones to make the same print. In order to be able to run off a lot of the prints, they would sometimes have two or more stones of the same image going at the same time. In some of these cases there are noticeable differences in the images, but in others the images were essentially the same. These duplicate stones were made using a transfer process and in doing this, the size of the image on the stones could vary somewhat.

So to be as precise as 1/16th of an inch doesn’t seem to make a lot of sense. Whenever one measures a Currier & Ives print, one should allow some variation in the size. How much is hard to say. Certainly an inch is too much, but for a large folio prints I would think upwards of about 3/8th inch difference from the “recorded” size would be acceptable if all other indications are that the print is an original. (Generally there will be more variation on the longer side than the shorter side).

As I indicated above, Conningham does not give the exact size of many of the prints. He does, however, always give a size category: “V.S.” for “very small,” “S” for small, “M” for medium, and “L” for large. Thus it is that dealers and collectors almost always will categorize Currier & Ives prints as being either “very small folio,” “small folio,” “medium folio,” and “large folio.”

Interestingly, the Currier & Ives firm itself never used these designations. I am not sure who first used these categories, but Conningham admits that he gives them “for convenience.” It is certainly true that most Currier & Ives prints were done either in a “small folio” size of about 8 1/2 x 12 1/2 or in a very large size, bigger than about 14 by 20, but really it is simply a convention to put all the prints into these four categories. There is quite a difference in the sizes within each group, and this sometimes leads to differences of opinion over, for instance, whether a print is a largish small folio or a smallish medium folio.

For what it is worth, Conningham says that a very small folio print is up to 7 x 9, a small folio is approximately 8 1/2 x 12 1/2, a medium is between about 9 x 14 to 14 x 20, and a large folio is over 14 x 20. One oddity is that Gale Research’s listing accepts these measurements from Conningham, even though their measuring system it totally different! As they are using the text in the size, they should either have increased the vertical sizes of their categories or have said that their size categories used only the image size. However, as I indicated, I think Gale Research got the whole measuring thing wrong from the beginning.

What my shop does is give both the category size and the size of the image itself. We have also followed this measuring system for other prints and maps, though there is less universal acceptance of this for other types of prints. Still, for Currier & Ives it is best to know and follow these conventions. It will help if you want to describe your print to someone else, it is the standard convention followed by most dealers who regularly deal with the prints, and it is the easiest way to check if you have an original or not.

218 comments:

A print being sold at an auction tonight is described as Currier and Ives Frozen up. Although the print looks old (it is in a frame) I suspect it is not an original because its image size is 13 inches by 18 inches. Is my suspicion well founded?

That is not the right size for this print. Most reproductions are the wrong size, which is the easiest way to filter out repros. However, there are also reproductions which are the right size. This one is not.

hello. I have a print that is "Frozen Up", came in a very old frame with rusty nails, the black print margin measures 9" x 14"..it also has large water stain from the title down, considerable toning and was quickly hand colored with about 4 colors..its not dot matrix under magnification and has a fairly hefty paperweight. Any ideas..I have many photos..thank you

I have an old Currier & Ives print "stopping place on the road, the horse shed" that measures 10 x 15 1/4. Does its size negate it being an original? I appreciate your willingness to answer. Thank you.

Is that based upon the size described in the book by Conningham? What is the correct size?... larger? I have my library finding the book so I ask because I have several other Currier and Ives I would like to authenticate. It is confusing because some of the other factors appear correct i.e. published, date 1868, etc on the print! Thanks again for your help.

It is based on my knowledge of the print, which I know to be larger than you quoted. Conningham will give the size and it will be larger. It is always good to check Conningham, but you should remember that the sizes there are for image only and there is always a little bit of variation because of the way paper changes over time.

Hi I have a small Currier & Ives.It is very old..How old don't know.I know its smaller then the C&I issues then I have seen that it should be on the internet.More like 6.5 by 5 inches.Its the four seasons of life...old age.It has no dots .It is solid when you look through a loop.Is on a thick stock.I says Jm ives del on the left and drawn by parsons and atwater on the right.Thanks

I have a print of Little Sarah. The print is a little girl with her kitten. The main color is blue. The frame is dark wood with gold trim and a wood back. Measurements are 12x16. The words Published by Currier and Ives Little Sarah 125 Nassua St New York. Is this an original? What is the value? Very curious. Thank you for your time.

If there is not date on the print, you have to use the address of the firm to give a date range. We list (on the Philadelphia Print Shop web site) a page with information on the firm, including the dates at different addresses.

There really isn't anything more to say about this print, nor most of the prints, other than the general information about most C&I prints. They were mostly issued for the same reason (to be hung on the walls of homes) and were done by staff artists. Again, if you visit our web site you can read about C&I and their prints.

I have come across a Lincoln "The Nation's Martyr" by Currier and Ives that measures roughly 9 1/2 by 14. I have seen both 9 1/2 by 10's and 9 1/2 by 14's selling for fair prices at online auctions. Could you assist me with detecting the genuine ones? Thank you!

We have 2 "inherited" C&I's Litho's - American Express Train & Across the Continent-Westward the Course of Empire Takes its Way - They are framed, approx. 23x30, papered on back and with hanging wire. They appear to be yellowed and faded. Is this due to age, environment, or is it the paper that is that color? Am thinking of getting them appraised by a local appraiser, to attain their "worth". Any opinions? The 2nd one does have the 1868 by C&I, plus Drawn by FF Palmer; The 1st print does have the "by FF Palmer, with address in middle lower part of print. thanks for any advise. Sharon

Without more information, for instance exact size of each image, I cannot say for sure, but given i) that these are images which have been reproduced many times, ii) that the originals are very, very scarce, iii) that the wording on the prints does not sound right, I would say that it is almost certain that these are reproductions and not originals.

We came across 2 C&I prints: trotting cracks at the forge and general meagher at the battle of fair oaks, VA June 1, 1862. Both are 9" tall by 14" wide. Could these be originals and if not, can old reproductions still be worth anything? They also include letters of authenticity.

i just aquired two Currier and Ives prints.Size 13X9edge of picture to edge. They are New York Bay and May Morning. I haved checked for the dot pattern and these have no dots,how do i check any more for authenticity ? Tks

I have a C&I Print 12 3/8 X 8 7/16 Tall edge to edge of printed area Winter morning in the country. No dots I guess stone Print but the colors have no bleed over and are perfect. Would this be the correct size for that. And where could you find the value of originals, so many newer prints listed. Thank You Leo in NM

Currier & Ives prints are measured (usually) from edge to edge of the image. If that is what you measured, then the size sounds about right. There are lots of reproductions of this print, but also originals are out there. The colors on these prints were done by hand, so there should be, at least somewhere, some going outside the lines (rarely is the coloring done perfectly).

I have a heavy (solid oak) framed print, The "Lightning Express" Trains. "Leaving the Junction." The image is 5 1/2 x 8 1/2". Directly underneath is printed; "Entered according to Act of Congress D. 1863, for Currier & Ives into the Clerk's Office of the District Court for the Southern District of NY. On the L is "DEL by FF Palmer." On the R is "LITH by Currier & Ives." The bottom center reads; "NY Published by Currier & Ives 152 Nassau Street. Was this print ever made in a VS size? Thank you!

Hi there, I have a 'Home To Thanks giving, it appears to be hand coloured but I am no expert, the size of the image only with no text included is aprox 16.2 inches x 9.65 inches, any information would be great appreciated, thanks in advance.

I have a old picture of two kittens playing in a basket with roses around it.The Date on it is 1878 by Curries & Ives. My father gave me this picture and said my great grandmother had it and pass it down to her daughter, Then my father and me. But it's maybe a 13 1/4 X 9 1/2. Could you tell me anything about this if you know.

I have an old Currier & Ives print, The bottom center reads; " Home for the Holidays." the bottom left read currier and ives; there is no date or anything on it excepted old WWII newspaper on the back but it maybe about 13 1/4 x 8 3/4

Hi. I have a print of The Drunkard's Progress which measures abt 9.5 x 14 inches (image size). It says "Lith. & Pub. by N. Currier." in the lower left, below the image. I bought it assuming it to be a reproduction, but just curious because when I look at the color with a hand lens, it looks like it has been colored with colored pencil or crayon. But it doesn't look that old. Would appreciate any info you can provide. Thank you!

Not sure what you mean by "original print," but if you mean could it be an original Currier & Ives print, then the answer is no. The original C&I print of this scene has other text just below the image (and above the title). There were lots and lots of prints made of this image so your print could be as early as the 19th century, but it is not a Currier & Ives.

I have come across a two-sided print. One side says "American Forest Scene Maple Sugaring Plate 113" the other side says "The Falls of Niagra Plate 114". Is this from a book? Would these be worth anything?

I have a C&I Clipper Ship Dreadnought Off Tuskar Light. In the bottom left corner is printed "Ch Parsons Del D McFarlane Pinxt" bottom right corner is " Lith N. Currier" Bottom Center is " Entered According to Act of Congress in the Year 1856 in the Clerks Office of the Southern District of N. Y." Next Line reads "Clipper Ship Dreadnought Off Tuskar Light" Next line reads "12 1/2 days from New York on her Celebrated Passage into Dock at Liverpool in 13 Days 11 Hours 1854" Next line reads "To Her Commander S. Samuels Esq. This Print is Respectfully Submitted by the Publisher" Last line reads "New York Published by N. Currier 152 Nassau Street" Dimensions of the print only are 16 1/8" x 24 14/". Any information you can provide would be appreciated.

Not sure what information you want as you have provided all there really is to say about the print (artist, title, date, etc.). The size sounds right so there is at least a good chance it is an original. There are some full sized reproductions of these prints, as well as some later printings, but the only way you can tell that is process and paper, which we can tell only by examining first hand.

Thank you. You gave me the answer I was looking for. I wanted to determine based on all the information on the print as well as size whether there was a reasonable chance it was original. I realize that to determine conclusively I will need to take it to an expert to analyze. If you had told me that it was definitely a reproduction, I wouldn't even consider spending the time and money to have it analyzed.

Yes, the firm did issue a print with that title. As I say above, there really isn't much to say about any particular print other than general information about the firm. They issued over 8,000 prints...

The size from top of rose to end of vasecis 12 1/2" and width from leaf to left leaf is 8 1/2". I did not measure frame or paper, just the picture itself. Also, there seem to be what I would call a typo. It states just underneath the Entered(doublespace) accordingly act of Congress in the year 1873 by Currier &Ives (noticevthe & sign and I, no space) in the Office of the Librarian of Congress at Washington. Now I cannot find a picture of this to compare to. I read that misprinted copies were destroyed. Is it possible this was supposed to be destroyed and I have the only one? Lol would love to know and maybecwhatvits worth?

No, this is not the only example. It is listed in the Conningham book as #5154. They would not destroy a print for such a minor error; similar things appear on numerous prints. Prints like this have what we call "decorative" value.

It is not specially more or less rare than any other typical Currier & Ives print. The firm issued over 8,000 prints and only a fraction of those are listed or pictured on line. The fact you couldn't find this one just means no one has listed it there.

I have a 16 x 241/2 Framed Print that reads Left side of Print Publishes by Shorewood Publishers, Inc. Middle reads The Four Seasons of Life :Old Age "The Season of Rest" CURRIER & IVES (ORIGINAL BY J.M IVES) The Right side reads The Harry T. Peters Collection,Museum of the City of New YorkCan you tell me anything about this is it a reprint?

This is a reproduction, not an original and not a reprint. There were some, but very few reprints of C&I prints, but none of the Four Seasons series. This is a reproduction (that is made photographically) by the Shorewood Publishers.

I have a medium size folio print of "A Home on the Mississippi" where the only text on the print is the title and in the lower left corner is says "Currier & Ives". No address or other information is on the print. With this being the case, is this still possibly an original?

No. That print was made only in the large folio size, about 16 7/8 x 24 1/8. You have one of the many reproductions of this scene. It is one of C&I's favorite images so was often reproduced. Many of these are quite attractive, but unless they are the large folio size, they are not originals.

In cleaning my 97 year old mother's belongings I found two prints in wooden frames. I wondered if they were original.

The frames are 8"x10 1/4" Both pictures are very yellowed and faded, with only a smidgen of color on a couple of items. The backs have paper with the words ["Olde Pine" finish a fine product of three mounaineers]

One print is SUMMER IN THE COUNTRY This print picture has a size of 4 7/16 x 7". The only color is the larger woman has a slightly pink dress.

The second print is FROZEN UP. This print picture has a size of 4 7/16" x 6 14/16". The sleigh, the woman's cape and the smallest man's coats are slightly pink.

The prints smell quite old. Were these prints once colored? If they are original, given their condition, do they have any worth? Thanks

Currier & Ives issued only a very few of the "very small folio" prints (similar size to your mother's prints). These are not ones they did in that size, so they are reproductions of some sort and have only "decorative" value.

Hi! I am trying to verify the authenticity of C&I's "American Homestead Spring." Below the print it reads "Pubd by Currier & Ives. Entered according to Act of Congress AD 1869, by Currier & Ives, in the Clerks Office of the District Court of the United States for the Southern District of New York 152 Nassau St. N.Y." the image measures 10"x15 5/8". many thanks for your reply.

C & I Excursion Steamer Columbia...size is appox. 19 1/4 by 34 1/4. Framed in 1955. Prior to framing it had some damages to it so it's most likely older than that. On heavy stock...hand coloring any idea.. who would have made this...thank you.

Hi, Mr. Lane. I've recently purchased a large folio size "New England Winter Scene" that has many of the hallmarks of a genuine print: white watercolor for snow, long, fuzzy fibers in the paper, correct image area, but - it looks too nice-very little toning or foxing. I suspect it is an Andres' Inc. reproduction but haven't been able to find an example on the internet to compare it to and my eyes don't seem to be able to tell the difference of a collotype print pattern. I've looked at auction sale images for this print and there is variation in those: red vs green sleds, heavy or light clouds. . . Am I correct to assume the Andres repros would be more uniform, like in the snow areas, as they were copied from a single original? Also, my print seems to have a lighter impression than the genuine prints. Is that typical of an Andres reproduction? There is also no gum arabic used. I have not taken this print out of the frame but, if I need to in order to get a feel for the paper thickness, I will. Can you help me discredit this print? (bet you haven't heard THAT before!) Thank you, Phyllis

The Andres prints are hand colored and so there is likely variation in them as well (I have not seen any side by side to compare). Really the only way to tell is the printing process. The odds are strong (from what you say) that yours is an Andres, but in the end that is the way to tell.

Thank you for your response. I plan to take the print out of the frame today and, if there is no hidden publisher I.D., and if the paper feels heavy, I intend to try to take an extreme close-up of an area of print. I do have another general question about this image: I have noticed a variation in the title section of this image sold at auction as original. On some, the publisher and address line ends under the "T" of the title and some end under the "E". I read there were at least two states of this image that C&I printed. Would the catalog raisonne by Gale have information on the differences? Thank you, Phyllis

Hi Mr. Lane,I just bought two 17.5" x 27.5" prints of "High Water In the Mississippi" and "Low Water In the Mississippi" which I really enjoy! One of them has some chips and I'm trying to decide how much to put into repairing it and would appreciate your help.

They both appear old and are definitely lithographed / hand painted. I have no expertise in identifying if arabic gum was used or if it's the right type of paper. Do originals have rough, pulpy edges like hand made paper or are they sharply cut? Also I was wondering if you knew what type of frames the original prints were sold in? Thanks for your time and expertise! You have a great blog! Brandon

The odds are very strong that these are the Andres reproductions and not originals. First, there about 50 of the Andres out there for every original, and the odds are even strong when you find them as a pair. Secondly, the size is a bit small (should be 18 x 28), though there is variation in the sizes of originals, so that is not definitive. The edges of originals are usually fairly clear cut, but that too can vary. There were all sorts of frames in which these prints were issued, and of course people can find "period" C&I type frames and put reproductions in them.In the end, I would say you almost certainly have reproductions (which are very nice, just not original C&I) but you really need to show them to someone who knows how to distinguish them by the process (stone litho vs. collotype). I would not spend a lot of money on conservation until you knew what you had. Good luck.

Hello Mr. Lane,I recently found a folio with my family's old marriage and birth certificates from the 1800 and early 1900's along with 3 extremely small C&I prints: The Four Seasons of Life - Childhood; American Country life - May Morning; American Winter Scenes - Evening. They appear very old and look to possibly be hand colored. The problem is that they are 3 6/16 x 5 1/8, so my only guess is that they could be trade cards. I'm guessing there's no way they're originals, so would you mind helping me figure out when they could have been created and by whom? They are definitely not modern reproduction prints. Thanks!

I do not believe that they are trade cards, but instead reproductions of some sort. There is no listing, in any case, for these titles as originals. Who did them and when is really impossible to tell. There have been reproductions of Currier & Ives prints since the beginning of the 20th century and thousands of companies have made them using hundreds of different processes. No one has tracked this nor is the information generally available. I doubt you'd be able to find out when and by whom they were done (unless it is printed on the prints themselves), so the best thing to do is simply enjoy them for what they are.

I have a framed May Morning lithograph. 10.5 x 14. It has the following printed below in tiny print:Entered according to Act of Congress in the year 1855 by N. Currier in the Clerk's office of the District Court of the Southern District of NYCould this possibly be an original?

Unfortunately, the print is the wrong size for an original. The original is about 16 3/4 x 24 (image size). This is a popular image and has been reproduced a number of times. Yours is one of those reproductions.

Hello Chris, I have American Homestead Summer size 7 14/16 x 12 7/16. On the left published by currier & ives, in the center Entered according to Act of congress in the 1868 By currier & ives in the clerks office of the district court of the U.S. for the Southern District of New York, on the right side 152 Nassau St. New York. I looked thru a loupe and see no dots and the colored areas look like watercolor. If it was a reproduction would the dots look like dots on a magazine? And does the size sound right. It has a brown line going down thru it, would that be foxing? Any info. would be great. Thank you

The size is about right so it very well could be an original. However, not all reproductions use the dot matrix format, so the fact there are no dots, while a good thing, is not conclusive. The brown line going down the middle sounds like acid burn from a wood backing to a frame. Quite typical of 19th century prints which were framed at the time.

I have a Currier "AMERICAN WINTER SCENES -Morning" of and odd size (small folio) and partially hand colored but of a mostly black and white. The dimensions are 5" W X just shy of 3 1/2" H - all the same larger references at the bottom border are there. Can you provide some help or references?

That is a reproductions. Many, many C&I reproductions have been made over the years and there is basically little written about them. If there is no publisher information on the print, I am afraid there really is no way to learn who did it and when.

When you say "reproduction" what exactly does that mean (modern or copies after the Currier Co existed?) This most surely is not modern....I have looked under magnification and there is no evidence of modern dot type printing techniques. After removing from the frame, there is a (No.3) at the bottom of the print.

A reproduction is a copy made from an original. A reproduction of a Currier & Ives print was not made by that firm. It is made by some sort of mechanical process (as opposed to a hand made lithograph, which is what C&I made). Reproductions have been made since the early 20th century, so they can be over 100 years old. They are still reproductions. (Dot matrix is only one form of reproduction, they were made by lots of different techniques)

As explained in this blog, there are two basic ways to tell. One is to compare the size to that listed in the reference books (like Conningham). If they do not match that size, then the print is likely a reproduction. The other way is to analyze the process of the print. If it is not a hand-done, stone lithograph, then it is a reproduction.

There is a lithograph by Currier "Mrs Fish And The Fox" 1852. The only place I can find this lithograph is at "The Library Of Congress" it appears to be a very rare lithograph as I can`t find on any auctions or just general searches outside printer reproductions from The Library Of Congress original which you can download. The subject matter and the story of Americas first mediums is of great historical significance.

This is an 1852 (prior to Ives association) lithograph. Why so many auction sales of many other lithographs, yet none found on this? Do you know where I may find more research info on this particular lithograph? Seems to be historically significant given the subject matter and the 40 year fraud that they pulled off.

There are probably about 8,000 different C&I prints. Only a small percentage of those come up at auction (or at least appear in the auction listings). Far more prints do not show up in auction listings than do show up. C&I did hundreds of prints of events/people involved in events of their day and all of them have a historical significance. Actually, there are less people interested in prints of the old scams than, say, prints of the Presidents or wars or the like, so such prints generally do not sell for as much as some other subjects. Still, they are very interesting especially when you take the time to do the research about them.

I have the presidents of the united states 1844. Jefferson is on the left of Washington at about 11;00. Madison is on the right at about1:00. The size would correspond to small. Could this be an original.

I have a copy of Currier & Ives "The Lightning Express Trains--Leaving the Junction. It matches the size description for Conningham #3535, and is not a photo-offset reproduction. But the date on the copyright notice is 1864, instead of the 1863 given in Conningham. Does this mean it is a reproduction? Thanks much for your advice.

Not necessarily. Currier & Ives regularly made modest changes to their prints which have not all been documented. So, while I have not seen a record of an original of that print dated 1864, that does not mean they didn't issue one. However, note that the best reproduction of this print (which is full size and hand colored) is not a photo-offset, but a collotype....

Chris--Thanks much for your prompt response. It has occured to me that my copy may be a collotype. Do you know of any appraiser in Washington, DC or Baltimore who can tell whether it's a reproduction or an original? Thanks again.

Hi Mr. Lane,Thank you for the service you provide and your patience with repeated questions. I was hoping to find that you had already answered my question but unfortunately you have not. I have a lithograph titled The "Lightning Express" Trains. I know its not an original mainly because it was printed by Einson Freeman Co. Inc. There is no publish date and I have not been able to find any information on this specific print by Einson Freeman. I have exhaustedly googled every combination of words relating to this print with no luck. If memory serves me right I believe Einson Freeman wasn't established until 1933 so publishing is not before that. Is there any value to this print other then decoration? It was my grandfathers and I'm not looking to sell it I would like to know for insurance/security reasons. Thank you for any information you can provide me and thank you again for the service you offer. Best wishes...

Currier & Ives prints have been published by many firms over the years; some of them done very well and some not so well. No reproduction of a C&I print has collector value: the value of all reproductions is what we call 'decorative.' That means the value is simply what someone would pay for a decorative item of particular quality, size, etc. While some of the larger, very attractive prints would sell for "something" it is really not something that needs insurance nor particular caution. Enjoy the print for the way it looks and do not worry about its value.

Sir, I have acquired a "small folio" C&I print titled "HOME FOR THANKSGIVING". We have determined the print is indeed a "litho" and the paper backing ont he frame is crumbling with age but still intact. My investigation has shown a C&I print titled "Home for Thanksgiving" and my print matches that image. Can you tell me what I have here? Thank you.

There is no small folio, original print of this title by Currier & Ives. Your print is some sort of reproduction. This image is one of the most famous and popular by Currier & Ives, so many firms have made reproductions over the years. Which company made it, one cannot say unless it has the name on the print, but given the size it is definitely a reproduction of some sort.

Mr. Lane, I have obtained 5 C&I prints that I would like your opinion on, please.

The first is :The Village Blacksmith-image size 10 x 14. Lower left below the image says "N. Currier Lith"Under the title of the Village Blacksmith, it says "Lith. & Pub by N. Currier 152 Nassau St. NY

The other four are the same image sizes. they are American Homestead Summer, American Homestead Autumn, the Roadside Mill, A Home in the Wilderness. All say "Published by Currier and Ives under the left corner of the image, and under the right corner they say "152 Nassau. NY. At the very lower left hand corner of the entire print is a circle with a "c" in it, which I assume means copywright and then the name Stapco, NY. I would certainly appreciate your input. Thank you very much.

These are all reproductions. Not only are the sizes incorrect, but no original C&I print has a copyright symbol on it like these. That doesn't mean they are not attractive and worth enjoying, but they are not original Currier & Ives prints.

Thank you for taking your time to read my question. I have Winter In the Country The Old Grist Mill. All of the required writing on the print that I won't repeat. It is 26 1/2 by 18. It is in an old gold frame with the Line No. etc. It then has the Artist Currier & Ives. Is this the right size for an original?

That is close, but not quite right, so the odds are it is a reproduction (there is a very good one, hand colored, done by Andres). There is always some variation in sizes, so your could be an original, but unlikely.

That is closer. Still, this is a print which has been reproduced in very good quality in near-actual size, so there is no way one can say what you have without seeing it in person and seeing what the process way. The odds are better, but this is quite a rare print, though the reproductions are somewhat common, so still unlikely yours is original. It could be, though.

I have the exact same "one." I am holding out that it is an original. For it to be an Andres version, is there any marking(s) possible outside the mat or on the back that would be a "tell?" I understand the bit about paper and printing process.

We just inherited a framed "Landscape, Fruit & Flowers". From what I have read online, I find none of the tell-tale signs of reproduction. So the next question is size: the print area measures 19-11/16 x 27-12/16. It also has the printing under the pic area, that matches the originals, and large borders, full paper size is 24-3/4x31-1/2. Is this potentially an original?

hello. I have a print that is "Frozen Up", came in a very old frame with rusty nails, the black print margin measures 9" x 14"..it also has large water stain from the title down, considerable toning and was quickly hand colored with about 4 colors..its not dot matrix under magnification and has a fairly hefty paperweight. Is this an original?..also the only other text besides the title is in the lower left ('CURRIER & IVES) ..thank you

It is my understanding that C&I produced a few small folio prints uncolored or "plain", however I can find no further information pertaining to them, neither through online research or Conningham's book. I have 2 prints. I expect they are reproductions only because their sizes are 4 1/2 x 7. "View on Hudson River from Ruggles House" and "Sunnyside on Hudson". They are in excellent condition with dark green matte, but the gold frames are aged. My question is, if little is known about the few uncolored prints produced by C&I how would I know for sure that I have reprints and not originals. I would guess that reproductions were made mostly in color if they were for decorative purposes as well as to mimic originals. Regardless of whether I have originals or not, I enjoy them. Any interesting information would be appreciated.

Actually, C&I produced quite a number of uncolored prints. Some of their prints (e.g. the political cartoons) only appeared B&W, but other prints appeared both colored and uncolored. The uncolored ones, however, tend not to sell that well so you don't see them listed that much.

As for your prints, they are reproductions, which one can tell simply because of the size. They are smaller than the originals of those subjects.

Yes, I knew their size would be the tell. I purchased them because I live quite near the Hudson and I love surrounding myself with bits of American History. I will continue to appreciate them and some day pass them on to one of my sons. I thank you Mr. Lane for your response.

Of course it could be, but the odds are against it. There are lots of large size images of this print and most are reproduction. The exact size needs to be the same and (more importantly) the process and paper...

Hi Chris.I have a C&I "The Lightning Express Trains" measuring 12 7/8 by 8 1/8. Also, Autumn and Winter Homestead measuring approximately 13 x 9. The Lightning Express has the number 106 in the middle bottom. I assume this is the catalog number. Are these the right sizes for these prints? Also, are "good" repros worth any money? Thanks! ~~Courtney

I recently did a little dumpster diving and found 5 C&I prints that I think are original, given where they came from and their subjects. They are ; 1. Washington Crossing the Delaware Evening previous to The Battle of Trenton, Dec. 25, 1776, 2. North Sea Whale Fishery, 3. General William H. Harrison, at the Battle of Tippecanoe, 4.The Storming of Fort Donnelson, Tenn, Feby, 15th, 1862 and finally, 5. Awful Explosion of the Peace-Maker on board the US Steam Frigate, Princeton, Feby. 1844. They all pass the magnifying glass test and do not have dots, are hand colored, somewhat faded, with some water damage and one with foxing, are in very old walnut veneer frames with wavy glass. All but the Battle of Tippecanoe are horizontally oriented scenes and the Tippecanoe is a vertically oriented print..... Do these seem like they are originals and what else should I be looking for to verify their originality? To determine their folio size, do I measure the image or the image and any printed details below the image? Any help would be greatly appreciated.

Size will definitely help you tell. I am out of town and do not have access to my references, but there are a number of books around which list the sizes. When measuring sizes of C&I prints, you measure just the image, not including any of the margins nor the printed information.

My grandmother had given me a lithograph ? of The Young Cavalier in a plain wooden frame which she said was never reframed. It contains title at bottom, left side reads Lith & Pub N. Currier; right side reads 152 Nassau St NY, under that 308. Measures from black rule to black rule 9" x 15" (vertically). Paper feels medium weight, slight course, has one color only on areas that are painted. Dots only. Blue color actually transferred onto my finger when I touched the picture. It has never been opened in over 50+ years. Any other info that would be able to identify if this is a reproduction or original? Thank you.

Just picked up a lithograph (?) from a thrift shop--Published by Currier & IvesSummer Morning.125 Nassau St. New YorkSize: 7 15/16" by 12 6/16"Appears to be an old frame; bubbles in glass; page of 1875 newspaper between the print and thin wooden backing.Any chance it could be an original. Thank you.

Mr. Lane,I just acquired 3 Currier & Ives prints. "Central-Park, Winter. The Skating Pond", "Clipper Ship Sovereign of the Seas", "The Meadow In the Sprintime. The Twin Lambs". All are on a woven paper, are 13 1/2 by 9 1/2. In looking through a magnify glass do not appear to have dots. Each use the address 152 Nassau St. Could these possibly be original or reproductions.

Well here we go and bless your heart for answering all of these questions. I have a C & I print. It is "Across the Continenet". The bottom reads from left to right in small print:J.M. Ives, DEL Entered according to Act of Congress in the year AD 1868, by Currier & Ives in the Clerks Office of the District Court of the United States for the Southern District of New York Drawn by F.F. PalmerThen in Big letters below:Across the Continent."Westward the Course of Empire Takes its way".Paper is thick and slightly rough. When held at an angle in the light I see some areas that are glossy and others are not. The painting is not perfect as some goes outside the lines. The picture itself without the border is: 27-1/8"W x 17-1/2" (slightly less than). I bought the picture framed from an antique mall for my husband because he likes trains. It has been sitting in the basement and does have some mold. I have removed from the frame to let it dry. Based on the info, and I know there is more that needs to go into this, but what are your thoughts on originality vs reproduction? Thank you so much in advance!

This is almost certainly a reproduction. First off, the original of this print is very rare, but there is a nearly full size reproduction which is fairly common. So based on that alone it is likely a reproduction. But the the clincher is that the print is somewhat smaller than an original should be. There is always some variation in the print sizes, but yours is a bit too much off and given the first point, I would say is about 99% sure to be a reproduction.

Hi Mr. Lane- was wondering if you could answer some questions for me-? I see people describing prints and asking you if they are real and you kind of answer sometimes like if it is real- good for you- they are meant to hang on the wall and enjoy. Well I am going to be real with you- I dug some out of my basement the other day and I am hoping they ARE real and someone wants to buy them for a lot of money. There. I said it. I have a great job as a nurse but am drowning financially due to drug addict ex husband. I have 2 kids in college and I need to pay a credit card off. With that being said- can you tell me how to measure these 2 prints and where to go to possibly sell them? They are matted and framed. It looks like the print in the middle was affixed to the top of the matting. Does that make sense? So do I measure just the pic itself? Not including the title and such? I have other questions, too.....can you help me?? Thank you sir!

When you measure a Currier & Ives print, you measure just the image. Not the margins, not the title, just the picture itself. If you post the exact titles and sizes I might be able to provide more information.

Thank you for responding! I have "American Winter Scenes-Morning" which measure 9" x 13 1/4" and I also have "Winter in The Country- The Old Grist Mill" which measures 8 6/8" x 12 7/8" thank you again!!

Hi, I just recently found two Currier and Ives prints, American Homestead Summer and A Home In the wilderness. They both measure 8 2/16 x 12 14/16. They both say published by Currier and Ives and 152 Nassau St. New York.

i have 2 paintings from C&I made on wood not on paper its named (SUNNYSIDE ON THE HUDSON) also 1 that says (THE SEASON OF BLOSSOMS) both measures 6.5 x8.5 not frame but the wood itself painting measures about 5.25 x 7.25 are this fake or any clue on these?

I have an "Hundred Leaf Rose'picture in a wooden frame (very old) measuring approximately 11 by 14 on the front in the frame and 12 by 14 on the back. I do not want to open this frame to determine exact size of picture. The picture is very faded. It has the title, published by Currier and Ives, the number 564, and 162 Nassau St. New York on Front.The paper has faded to tan and has a matte finish. I do not see any dot matrix and some of the painting is outside of the lines. I do not see any shiny areas on the painting. Is this a reproduction? Thank you for any information you can offer.

Hello, I measured only the actual flowers and it measures 9 inches by 11 3/4 inches. This does not include the title or any other wording The address is NOT 162 Nassau as I stated earlier but 152 Nassau St. Thank you again.

Hi,I have "Jesus Blessing Little Children" print in an old wooden frame with tiny rectangular head nails keeping in a wooden back to the frame. I love the image of Jesus with Jesus placing his hands on two of the children and two others are in their mothers arms.The print reads (from left to right):Published by Currier & IvesEntered according to Act of Congress AD 1867, by Currier & Ives in the Clerks Office of the District Court of the United States of the Southern District of New York152 Nassau St. New York

JESUS BLESSING LITTLE CHILDREN,"But Jesus said, Suffer little Children, and forbid them not, to come unto me for such is the kingdom of heaven." St. Mat XIX.14.

I think this may be an original, but am curious of your opinion. The image is all black and white. It has NOT been hand painted/colored.

Hi, I have 4 C&I lithographs I believe them to be Very Small Folio all 4 are 5 1/16 x 3 5/81. American Winter Scenes Morning F.P. PALMER, DEL 1854 2. AMERICAN WINTER SCENES EVENING F.P. PALMERDEL 19543. NEW YORK BAY FROM BAY RIDGE L.I. F.P. PALMER18604. AMERICAN COUNTRY LIFE MAY MORNING F.P. PALMER 1855All entered on date listed to act of congress b N. Currier in clerks office of the district court of southern District of N.Y. and pulished by N. currier 152 Nassau ST. N.YAre they originals? I've had them for about 25 years.

Hello! I have an image called "The Express Train." It looks very old and is printed on thick paper. Unfortunately the corners have been cut off so that it could be mounted on an octagonal mat. I measured between the black lines bordering the image, and it is 8.5 inches by 6.25 inches. The text on the print says "PUBLISHED BY CURRIER & IVES" on the left. In the middle it says, "ENTERED ACCORDING TO ACT OF CONGRESS IN THE YEAR 1870 BY CURRIER & IVES IN THE CLERKS OFFICE OF THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK". On the right it says "152 NASSAU ST. NEW YORK".

Do you think this may be an original? And if it is, do you think it has any value remaining with the corners cut off? Thank you in advance. I'm enjoying reading your blog!

Hello i have a few questions, i purchased some currier and ives prints, they are framed. They have a sticker on the back that appears very old thats from a former seattle department store called, Frederick and Nelson of Seattle that appears to have some type of serial number. Out of the four framed prints i have, all have the frederick and nelson sticker but only 2 of the stickers with what appears to be a serial number are partially legible. How many digits should they be? I am unable to take the prints out of the frames, because it is a paper back frame glued to the wood frame. The Currier and Ives signatures in all 4 portraits do not look identicle, the writing in the signature is dfferent in each. I know the size of each of the different peices of art are very important in determining authenticity. The frame measures approximately 11 inches wide by 9 tall. But due to the black border on the glass around the frame i can not tell what size the total paper measures. But the actual color of the art is only 7 wide by 4.5 tall. Does this mean it is automatically not authentic? Any advice with this greatly helps. I may be reached at khyferg@gmail.com

These prints are reproductions, not original Currier & Ives prints. The sizes are too far from the originals for them to be that. This is typical of the type of decorative prints which were sold by various stores in the 20th century.

There is not particular information about most C&I prints, like yours. The only information you can get is on the firm in general and on the subject, which you know. Date you can tell either because it is written on the print or by using the address (the dates of various addresses are listing in a number of books and also several places on line) Beyond that there really isn't anything to tell you.

Hello - I purchased a vintage N. Curries print today titled "FORDING THE RIVER" on the left side, below the margin reads N. CURRIER, LITH. On the right reads: F. PALMER, DEL. It is framed and matted with an old label on the back by F.D. Rice and Son Aurora, Ill. The print size to the margin I can see is 10-3/8" x 15" - When I use a loupe it does not appear to be a series of dots. Does this sound like a genuine old Currier Lithograph? Thanks in advance for your help.

My mother-n-law past away recently and antiqued a lot in her day. She always told us she had an original print. We found framed an American Forest Scene Maple Sugaring. In the bottom right it has LITH BY N CURRIER NY and in the bottom right it shows O. We wanted to take it out of the frame but it seems very frail. What do you think of this?

This is quite a rare print, though reproductions of it are not that uncommon. From what you write about the text under the image, it appears this is a reproduction and not an original. One further way to check is that the image should be 27 1/2 x 20 3/4 inches. If your mother-in-law's print is not that size, then it is definitely not an original.

Mom past away and there is a currier and ives scene called a clearing on the american frontier in a frame that's been on her wall my entire life, I'm fifty. She claimed it was for real, but how do I know for sure?

Welcome

Welcome to the Antique Prints Blog, a blog about original prints from the seventeenth to the early twentieth century, with a primary focus on historical prints of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. This is a blog for anyone interested in this topic. Comments and suggestions are always welcome.